What's with cycling on the RIGHT of a path?

[Ellieb]

It's not. Most wobble at low speed, which is recognised in design manuals as requiring more width... and if any route is that busy, it needs enough width, until at least two cyclists can pass each other while passing two walkers.

Ok.. So while we are waiting for that to be built, what do we do in the meantime? & funnily enough, most people have no problem at all easing to walking speed behind a pedestrian. They do it all the time.

[jgurney]

....most people have no problem at all easing to walking speed behind a pedestrian. They do it all the time....

.....scenarios like bridle paths with cars on, …the instances of this happening are so infrequent ....

....99% of cyclists keep left, most walkers keep left. Nobody seems to find it difficult....

Are these claims supported by any research or data, or are they your personal observations?

[jgurney]

most people have no problem at all easing to walking speed behind a pedestrian. They do it all the time.

In the sense that any competent cyclist can use their brakes, of course we "have no problem at all easing to walking speed behind a pedestrian" if that is called for. However on anything being called a cycling route it should not be called for at all often, let alone all the time.

In the sense of wanting viable cycling routes, one where trying to use it means "having to spend" "all the time" at "walking speed behind a pedestrian" is a serious problem. We might as well just walk as cycle at walking speed. I can't see many people being tempted to switch from driving to cycling at walking pace, but cycling at 12-15 mph makes cycling a viable replacement for many urban car journeys. (Although we may be at risk of thread drift towards general cycle route design issues and away from the issue of walking on the left or right here).

[pwa]

It is certainly easier if people approach each other knowing what the other is about to do. But for a lot of shared path users they are perceived as not being roads or highways, whatever their legal status. A lot of people feel them to be a place where things are more relaxed and the need to think about rules does not apply. On a practical level, supposing we agree that greater adherence to a set of road type rules should happen, getting people to change their attitude to one of compliance is likely to take a very long time. I think we are just going to have to take care and handle our own frustration at other people's lack of sense.

Again, I emphasise that my experience does not include very busy city routes.

[ANTONISH]

On the Danube cycle path I found that some cyclists were riding on the left - not too much of a problem with a normal cyclist but groups on e-bikes coming round a corner are harder to deal with.

[Bmblbzzz]

Saying it's easier if pedestrians on a path walk on the left (or right) because then a cyclist can slowly follow them until safe to overtake (or can negotiate with them, move out to overtake, etc) completely ignores the factors of width and busyness. Many paths aren't wide enough for a pedestrian and two bikes to pass; many are.

[Stevek76]

All I am saying is that it is much easier to follow behind a walker than to have to negotiate them head on.

It's not. Most wobble at low speed, which is recognised in design manuals as requiring more width... and if any route is that busy, it needs enough width, until at least two cyclists can pass each other while passing two walkers.

I'd say it is much easier, but even if you struggle to keep a dead straight line at walking pace, you can see that there are pedestrians ahead and that they're moving at ~3mph away from you provides much more negotiating time in terms of having a gap in oncoming traffic (bikes/walkers) than if they're closing at 3mph.

And yes it would be wonderful if UK had proper design approach to this, but we don't, what design guidelines exist aren't mandatory enough at the national level and few councils are willing to take the initiative on this either so as it is, we have decades old paths like the BBRP that have seen year on year increases in use and, for the most part is around 3m wide. I.e. narrow enough that it's really a single 'lane' each way as middle overtakes are possible but uncomfortable and risky if anyone deviates.

Generally there the custom that has developed is to keep left regardless of what you are. Those on the right are few and far between, particularly at commute times (a summer weekend and the whole path obviously has a more relaxed attitude), and largely just cause uncessary conflict.

[Mick F]

...........when the rule is we walk on the right in this country?

What rule is that then?
News to me.

I guess that the reference is to the advice generally given to pedestrians walking on country roads and lanes with no footway, which is to walk on the right of the road so that the traffic closest to you is facing you. The exception to that is on bends, where you are advised to walk on the outside of the bend where you are likely to be seen sooner. But that is all for roads, not shared use paths.

Yep. Correct.

[LollyKat]

On my local towpath I always ride on the left as do most of the cyclists, but I give way as required to walkers and joggers - apart from basic courtesy it is less effort for me to switch sides than it is for them. This morning I met a jogger towards me running on her right, and a bit behind her were two policemen on foot, also on their right. I duly moved over and let the jogger past, but then the police moved across to their left so I had to change back again. I don't know if you can infer anything from that - I thought of stopping to ask.

[mjr]

All I am saying is that it is much easier to follow behind a walker than to have to negotiate them head on.

It's not. Most wobble at low speed, which is recognised in design manuals as requiring more width... and if any route is that busy, it needs enough width, until at least two cyclists can pass each other while passing two walkers.

I'd say it is much easier, but even if you struggle to keep a dead straight line at walking pace,

Tough. All of you can say whatever you like and a few expert cyclists may be able to ride dead straight at near-zero speeds, but low-speed wobble is well-known and something that the oft-derided LTN 2/08 actually gets correct: "For most cyclists, a speed of 7 mph (11 km/h) or more is required to ride comfortably in a straight line without a conscious effort to maintain balance. Above 7 mph, the amount of deviation, i.e. the additional width needed when moving, is 0.2 metres. Below this, deviation increases – at 3 mph deviation is typically 0.8 metres (see Figure 2.1)"

you can see that there are pedestrians ahead and that they're moving at ~3mph away from you provides much more negotiating time in terms of having a gap in oncoming traffic (bikes/walkers) than if they're closing at 3mph.

Please explain how you can negotiate anything with the back of a walker's head?

And yes it would be wonderful if UK had proper design approach to this, but we don't, what design guidelines exist aren't mandatory enough at the national level and few councils are willing to take the initiative on this either so as it is, we have decades old paths like the BBRP that have seen year on year increases in use and, for the most part is around 3m wide. I.e. narrow enough that it's really a single 'lane' each way as middle overtakes are possible but uncomfortable and risky if anyone deviates.

Generally there the custom that has developed is to keep left regardless of what you are. Those on the right are few and far between, particularly at commute times (a summer weekend and the whole path obviously has a more relaxed attitude), and largely just cause uncessary conflict.

No, the cause of the conflict is the Councils that Used to Be Avon and the various West of England Partnership/Combined Authority and so on failing in their transport duties and not implementing their own claimed transport policies. People are muddling through and making the best of a bad situation (which is what we have to do until it is expanded, to answer an earlier question), but in normal situations walkers keeping left will actually reduce the throughput of a cycleway because of the increased width requirement, so please let's not screw over all cycleways because of the few that are overloaded due to failing highway authorities.

[Ellieb]

Please explain how you can negotiate anything with the back of a walker's head?

Errr.... Negotiate as in ‘negotiate an obstacle course’, not negotiate as in going to ACAS to hammer out an agreement.
To be honest if the gist of your argument is that it is impossible for a cyclist to ease up to walking pace without being dangerously unstable I am perfectly happy to back real world experience against tendentious reasoning.

[mjr]

To be honest if the gist of your argument is that it is impossible for a cyclist to ease up to walking pace without being dangerously unstable I am perfectly happy to back real world experience against tendentious reasoning.

I'm not saying dangerously unstable. I'm just not accepting the falsehood that slowing down to walking pace makes passing others easier.

[Bmblbzzz]

I remember that I have deliberately ridden on the right of the BBRP, a few decades ago (early to mid 90s). There was much less traffic on it then -- you could ride from Bath to Bristol midday on a weekday and see only a couple of cyclists -- and only about half of it was tarmacced, so conflict was rare. But more relevantly, why did I do it? Simple; I was not an experienced or knowledgeable cyclist and a journey each way in a day could get me knackered, so I was sheltering from the headwind.

[Ric2013]

Cheers, bumblbzz. An answer!

(Although we may be at risk of thread drift towards general cycle route design issues and away from the issue of walking on the left or right here).

Although actually the OP's question (i.e. mine) said nothing about pedestrians whatsover, so you may as well deviate to your heart's content at this point lol.

[Spicy]

With pedestrians I prefer them on their left.

If I'm doing 15mph, and they are walking at 3 mph the closing speed is 12 mph, I can slow down and follow if I need to. If they are walking towards me on my side, then the closing speed is 18 mph.

A situation I have seen on a number of occasions is where a pedestrian was walking towards me on my left. I could see another cyclist coming up behind the pedestrian, so stayed to my left. As the other cyclist is about to pass the pedestrian, the pedestrian decides to get out of my way by walking into the path of the other cyclist. I have seen a couple of very near misses like this.